Week14---LIMENGCHEN Do you think Wikipedia is a good news site?

To be honest, I’ve never really thought of Wikipedia as a news site. It’s not like traditional media—it doesn’t have reporters, firsthand coverage, or push out breaking headlines. But I’ve realized that as I consume news more and more, I’ve also become more dependent on Wikipedia.

I don’t go to Wikipedia to check what “just happened.” It won’t tell me who said what today or give me the latest updates right away. So if I simply want to know what’s going on, I still turn to news websites first.

But the problem is, news sites often only show the surface of an event. I often find myself reading a news article and realizing I don’t actually understand the background behind it. That’s when I open up Wikipedia. For example, if I come across a political figure I don’t know, a protest I’m unfamiliar with, or a policy I’ve never heard of, Wikipedia can quickly tell me the full story—context, history, related events, and key people involved. Sometimes I click from one article to another and end up reading for an hour without realizing it.

What’s more, I’ve found that Wikipedia sometimes shows things the news doesn’t mention. News might only report the final result of an event, but Wikipedia often pieces together the full timeline, giving me the background and causes all in one place. Sometimes it feels like the news is just the start of a conversation, and Wikipedia provides the rest of the story.

Of course, Wikipedia updates quickly, but it’s not always stable. Especially when something major just happened, articles can be edited frequently, and some sources may not be very reliable. That’s why I usually check the page’s edit history or references to see how trustworthy the content is. Sometimes I even look at the “Talk” page to see how editors are debating what should or shouldn’t be included—honestly, that part is pretty interesting too.

So even though I don’t think Wikipedia is a news site, it plays a really important role in how I understand the news. News tells me what happened, but Wikipedia helps me understand why it matters and what came before it. That process, for me, is more meaningful than just knowing the basic facts. It’s like a tool that helps me connect the dots and see the bigger picture.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Introduction to the blog

This blog is a digital forum where students from Collective Intelligence in Practice: Understanding Wikipedia at the Hanyang University in Korea (2025) will discuss their weekly readings and activities. Each week you are expected to post a blog post on our blog and make a comment on another student's post. You can do so on one of the following three topics: a) You can blog about the readings for the next week. As you are expected to do the assigned readings FOR the lectures they are assigned to, you are expected to post your blog and comments BEFORE that lecture. An ideal commentary should be about half a page in length (~200 words), divided into three clearly labeled sections in which you: 1) summarize in your own words of materials you read; 2) mention any new, interesting, or unusual items learned; 3) identify at least one question, concern, or discussion angle that is either problematic in some respect or could have been elaborated more. This question is likely to be incor...
Read more

Week 1. My Recent Wikipedia Edits - Jeong seolah (정설아)

I made several edits to the Wikipedia page for 'Daegu'.  Daegu, located in the southeastern part of South Korea, is the third-largest urban area in the country, following Seoul and Busan. With a population exceeding 2.3 million, it is the fourth-largest metropolitan city in South Korea and the second-largest in the Yeongnam region after Busan. Often referred to together with the surrounding North Gyeongsang Province as Daegu-Gyeongbuk, this region is home to over 5 million residents. Known for its rich history and vibrant economy, Daegu stands as a key player in South Korea's cultural and industrial landscape. Below is a summary of the changes I contributed. 1) Summarize and link Sights Section:  - Improved clarity by changing “mountains keep many traditional temples” to “the mountains keep many traditional temples.” Mosque Controversy Section:  - Simplified a sentence by removing “and of the authorities.” Festivals Section:  - Made phrasing smoother by changing “tho...
Read more

Week4 - Review about the readings for the next week. - Jo HyeonSeong (조현성)

 1. Summarize in my own words of materials. The book is primarily about the openness of Wikipedia. Openness means that anyone can participate in the creation and editing of articles without any qualifications. Openness can be a double-edged sword. While it means that you can edit without having expert knowledge of a topic, it also means that you can participate even if you have expert knowledge. For experts, articles written by non-experts can come across as inaccurate knowledge, which can anger experts. This anger can also be a catalyst for Wikipedia to continue to improve. However, articles edited only by non-experts can cause misunderstandings and convey incorrect information, so openness can be considered a double-edged sword. In fact, it sometimes causes some conflict, such as Wales' negative stance. Openness also means freedom from copyright, which means anyone can take it and use it anywhere. That is why the knowledge of non-experts can have greater impact. That is why appro...
Read more